Want to fight global warming? Start rationing like Britain did in World War 2! At least, that’s the idea that “one of Britain’s oldest and most influential newspapers” is promoting.
British publication The Times ran one of the nuttiest bits of climate change babble in a Feb. 20 story headlined: “How to fix global warming? Bring back rationing, say scientists.” The first sentence of the piece dripped with brain-melting nonsense: “Second World War-style rationing of petrol, household energy and meat could help to fight climate change, British scientists have recommended.”
The newspaper cited “researchers” – whom it does not name until the end of the article – from the University of Leeds who published climate propaganda disguised as analysis in the journal Ethics, Policy & Environment. The Times quoted the study, which also suggested giving citizens a “carbon allowance" and creating a “scarcity of fossil fuels.”
Apparently the elitist Times is itching for a déjà vu to satisfy the extremism of woke climate idealists. The Times currently has an estimated Monday-Saturday print readership of 843,766.
JunkScience.com founder Steve Milloy slammed the British newspaper in comments to MRC Business: “Climate alarm has always been about increasing government control of our lives. Climate is tyranny disguised as necessity.”
Of course, what The Times was selling was massive government intervention. “The researchers argue that, as a first step, governments would need to regulate sectors such as the oil industry, with the importing of fossil fuels ‘banned or restricted’ in certain areas.” In effect, said The Times, “[t]his would create a scarcity of fossil fuels, with rationing then introduced to ‘manage the scarcity’, they explain.”
The actual so-called “study” cited by The Times took the insanity a step farther: “‘Governments could limit the number of long-haul flights an individual could make in a year or they could limit the amount of petrol one can buy in a month.’”
Uh, what? How is that a good thing? Statista noted that Britain’s dependence on fossil fuels in 2021 was still a sizable 78.3 percent, which indicates disaster if the British government starts rationing out fuel.
Apparently, The Times pushed for other nations to adopt this same insane model: “Researchers from Leeds said that rationing would help countries to cut their carbon emissions ‘rapidly and fairly’ even though it was often seen as an ‘unpalatable option.’”
The newspaper even promoted how “[a]n alternative method would be through the ‘modernisation of rationing with carbon cards, like bank cards, to keep track of your carbon allowance rather than ration cards.’”
Milloy stated that “[r]ather than calling for rationing, scientists should be asking why there has been no global warming since 2015 despite about 500 billion tons of emissions.” He continued: “We are told that every emission causes warming, yet there has been none since 2015. So what good would rationing even do?” The suggestion to force people onto an unwanted diet to fight the left’s green boogeyman is about as stupid as when climate change extremists were advocating for “melting the arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot” to stave off so-called global cooling in the 1970s.
Conservatives are under attack. Contact The Times at email@example.com and demand it stop promoting food rationing as a way to fight so-called global warming.